World Views on Gulf Oil Spill

Undoubtedly, there are and will be long-term ramifications for both: the BP Company and the government of the United States. But the point is that not only them but their lax regulators are also considered to have fault for the disaster.

But the BP’s executives are confident that the oil spill was not something which could have been predicted. Also they claim that their safety and protection systems are reliable enough so that they do not need any serious improvements or alters.

A strong impression was made by the words of Shell Alaska’s vice president-Pete Slaiby. He said in front of BBC that the oil spill could have been like a “wake-up” for some companies but Shell Alaska is certainly not one of those.

Josh Watson, the chairman of the second biggest oil company in US, has announced that he ordered a thorough review about the company’s off-shore oil operations. Obviously, his sudden interest, or worry, was provoked by the disaster caused by BP since the review’s order had been given soon after the oil spill. Anyway, the most important fact is that all off-shore operations and practices are absolutely safe for the environment.

Unsurprisingly, many other oil companies all over the world have announced the very same message.

Everything shows that the regulators find the arguments given by the industrial companies persuasive since they are not insisting on any restrictions, at least for now!

The UK government also announced that they have done thorough research of all oil companies in the country. Everything shows that their systems are reliable and robust so that risk of disasters like this in the Gulf of Mexico. Still, UK claims that the environmental inspections will be doubled for better protection and more safety. By the way, UK government is about to allow the drilling of deepest off-shore oil well ever!

Basically, USA is one of the few countries which ordered a moratorium of deep-water drilling. Most of the other countries such as Australia, UK, Brazil and many others have not followed their example, at least for now.

Actually, Australia’s position seems a little surprising since there was a similar incident several months before the disaster in Gulf Mexico.

Australia’s resource minister, Martin Ferguson, announced that putting the economy at risk by closing down dozens of off-shore oil wells will do nothing for the safety. So, it’s just not worth the sacrifice.

Surprisingly, the government in Libya encouraged the future deeper drilling so that the amounts of oil could be increased. Anyway, there is nothing like moratorium on deep drilling. Just on the contrary, obviously!

However, Italy’s position seems to be very different. A bill has already been passed and there is a ban on drilling in less than 5 kilometers from the shore. But the protected marine areas are insured even better- there is a ban on drilling in less than 12 kilometers from such protected areas. Fortunately, this is not likely to affect on the oil’s yields since the greatest oil fields are thought to be within the permitted area.

But what environmentalists say is that Italy’s ban could be something like a fig-leaf.

Norway and Canada are two of the countries in which there was a great public pressure. A moratorium on off-shore drifting was considered but eventually, it was dismissed as the bill could not be passed.

So, there is no doubt that the greatest change will happen in the US. But the truth is that that’s the greatest oil-spill of all times. The oil companies and the industry as a whole had led a fight against the tougher rules but after the oil-spill automatically put the end of the fight: tougher rules will come!

The US regulators are, without doubt, strongly influenced by the so called American Petroleum Institute. So, the institute will certainly play a crucial rule in creating the new rules and laws related to the higher security of off-shore oil operations.

But it was reminded to the lawmakers that every change going to be made, every bill going to be passed may have a dramatic affect on the economy. That is why before deciding on anything related to ban or restrictions on off-shore operations, it should be thought through.

Also, the industry companies announced their plans for finding a vessel which would be able to contain large amount of the spilled oil.

A number of oil companies’ executives also mentioned the idea of drifting two (instead of one) emergency wells so that the security could be at higher levels. Even in case of spills or blow-outs, the situation would be absolutely possible to handle thanks to the emergency wells.

But Rex Tillerson, an executive of ExxonMobil, responded to the idea by saying that it is nothing but doubling the risk!

And what another executive said is that it would double not only the risk but the company’s expenses also.

Anyway, most of the companies have already accepted the fact that they will have to keep much stricter rules and laws. Probably, they know that there is nothing they can do about preventing the tougher rules.

Such new rules and laws include the government’s require for detailed information about the companies’ drilling intentions and programs, how the companies are going to deliver their projects/programs done, how they are going to decrease the risk of blow-outs to minimum etc.

All these new rules and laws remind of the situation when a gas platform exploded in UK in 1988. The explosion caused the death of 167 people and it is what made the UK government at that time to initiate a lot of reforms having one goal: higher levels of security and minimizing the risk of accidents. At that time, US also thought about initiating new reforms considering better safety measures but they were dismisses eventually. However, it is now sure that the US government will not dismiss any of the reforms related to minimizing the risk of blow-outs.